another old pic of bissette


SRBissette said...

Shee-it. That ain't me, no how, no way!

Nice shot of you on the new masthead, though. Love the whole new blog look -- dark, but -- Very dressy!

Benny said...

I look fat enough in a bathing suit already to even THINK about adding any air to it.

"That's all right, y'all. You enjoy your swim. I'll just sit here on the bank and have some more potato salad."

eeTeeD said...

i think i will join you on the bank, benny.
the ad says that the "air lungs" are "invisible" when worn. i'm guessing they would be about as invisible as wearing a half dozen pairs of "depends".

greg said...

At first glance, the new layout looks graphically pleasing. Then, I try to read it and my head begins to throb.

Mark Martin said...


How come Woodring gets away with it? Every time I try out a black background somebody balks.

The problem is, I agree! It looks so cool! But it makes my eyes hurt!

I'll go study this. I'll probably change back to a dark text on lite background. Let's face it, I'm a goth failure.

greg said...

If you're speaking of, I think nobody balks because there's no way to post comments on his site. But bold, neon green on black? I'll balk about that right now: BALK!

Anyway, there are worse things to fial at than being goth.

BonzoGal said...

Didja see the line at the bottom? "Also can be worn by women with bra"!
Well, I'm a women with bra(s), and I ain't wearin' no shorts with no floats in 'em, nohow.

I dig the black background, and the pink and purple text, but white text on black is a bit fuzzy.

Mark Martin said...

I did see that line! It is very insulting. In other words "You women can wear them too, but for God's sake cover your tits!" I'm surprised Bissette posed for this ad. But then again, he is full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

Greg, I was actually thinking of Jim's blog, but the site is also very goth.
I think his blog is less stressful on the eyes because the text is larger and it's just whites and grays. And for all I know, maybe somebody has balked. I read comments there, but not religiously.

Mark Martin said...

Argh. Blogger has four navbar colors to choose, and they all suck. That's why the navbar sucks in this cool new orange layout I just created.

More readable, but the orange (or any color) creates havoc with some images. That's why so many artists go with black, white or gray.

Oh well. I gotta go now.

Jed said...

I use black, and not enough people read my blog for their opinions to matter. plus, art looks so much snappier against black. Against white, if you have an image without a border and it's got a white background you completely lose the composition since the white background just disappears into the rest of the page, but then when you click on it to enbiggen, that happens anyway, so it's kind of no-win. But black DOES go good with everything. Its universally contrasty.

Speaking of my blog: a late note to Bonzogal: your suggestions for my Elliot Gould challenge were awesome if I knew who half of those people were. I was going to look it up, but then I got tired.

Orange is ok. And I like the new psychedelic groovy colors on your self caricature.

I understand some of the bafflement, Mark--take the post, "Young Turok Fan" for example. If you have no idea who or what "Turok" is, it's not till the next post that you're given an opportunity to find out after clicking on a link, and considerable scrolling. Then there's the business about the glasses. Identifying the glasses as--what? I'm thinking brand maybe? What's the point? Then later we discover you mean the glasses are similar to Larry "Bud" Melman's (or whatever they're calling him these days) which are like Steve Bissette's (I think). It's all very confusing and takes too much work without context.

And yes, the blog gets very self-referential to the point of being completely "Whahuh?" to the casual reader. But does it need to be accessable to the masses? Or is it for us alone, your loyal coterie of fans who for the first time get to use the word "coterie" in a sentence? All because of you Mark? What am I even talking about?

Oh well.